I have adopted the principle that I will not support a lesser evil
Then you're supporting the greater of two evils by default.
When you start thinking about politics with your head instead of your heart, and you accept the truth (and it is the truth) that there's no way your minor party can win, you will realize that your only viable choices are the greater of two evils or the lesser of two evils. And that by abstaining, you're choosing the greater of two evils by default.
Have you heard of the trolley problem? It's an ethical dilemma thought experiment.
If you do nothing, the train will continue straight ahead and kill five people. But if you throw the switch, one person will be killed, and it will be through your action.
What do you do?
They're both bad outcomes, but one is worse than the other and you have to choose. By saying "I won't choose the lesser of two evils" and instead doing nothing, you will get the worst possible outcome. The same goes for Canadian elections. Doing nothing and letting the train kill five people is analogous to not voting for either major party, and thus allowing the LPC to win again (worst possible outcome).
Then you're supporting the greater of two evils by default.
When you start thinking about politics with your head instead of your heart, and you accept the truth (and it is the truth) that there's no way your minor party can win, you will realize that your only viable choices are the greater of two evils or the lesser of two evils. And that by abstaining, you're choosing the greater of two evils by default.
Have you heard of the trolley problem? It's an ethical dilemma thought experiment.
Suppose you're standing next to a train track switch and there's a train barreling down the tracks. There's five people on the tracks straight ahead of the train, but only one person on the tracks that branch off.
If you do nothing, the train will continue straight ahead and kill five people. But if you throw the switch, one person will be killed, and it will be through your action.
What do you do?
They're both bad outcomes, but one is worse than the other and you have to choose. By saying "I won't choose the lesser of two evils" and instead doing nothing, you will get the worst possible outcome. The same goes for Canadian elections. Doing nothing and letting the train kill five people is analogous to not voting for either major party, and thus allowing the LPC to win again (worst possible outcome).
And then you the worst of two evils, because you put emotions ahead of outcomes.
Then people will do something about all those victims who end up tied to railroad tracks.